Attorney Michael de Broglio on: South Africa, Law, Politics, Attorneys, Sport, Photography, Technology, Gadgets, Media, Crime, Road Accidents Fund,
Divorce, Maintenance, Personal Injury, Medical Negligence
Experts the Road Accident Fund use compared to experts we use
In my preparation for a trial recently I spent some time reading the report of the clinical psychologist for the Road Accident Fund detailing our client’s head injury. Our client had to be incubated and at one stage had a GCS of 9/15 with a fracture of the skull base and an occipital fracture as well. She is left with headaches and the expert for the Road Accident Fund describes this as “a moderate concussive brain injury”. The expert goes on to say that she will finish school, achieving a Grade 12 education and this is exactly what she was likely to achieve in life before the accident. In other words, really, there is nothing wrong with her at all and she will still on to be whoever she could have been.
By comparison, our experts say that before the accident she was a child with a bright average ability and now suffers from neuropsychological difficulties. Her verbal functioning is now in the borderline range and her non-verbal functioning is in the average range. Her mother says she is hyperactive, she is mentally slow and our clinical psychologist says of the brain injury that our client sustained “a brain injury of such severity that it cannot be ignored …”. Were it not for the accident, our client would have been able to go on and study at University. It is again a reminder, and I have dealt with this in my blog before, that it is all good and well to hear advertisements on the radio that the Road Accident Fund will help people with their claims, but if they are going to send the people to experts who basically trivialise a very serious brain injury and make out that there is nothing wrong with the person, then that free assistance is as good as what is being paid for the advice. In other words, you get what you pay for, and if you pay nothing, you are normally going to get a very poor result.
Posted by Michael de Broglio on Monday 09-Dec-13
Post a Comment
Comments
Tersia said:
on Friday 13-Dec-13 04:17 PM
I absolutely agree with you. If people could only realize, but I suppose some people will have to learn the hard way. I cant understand how they can even call themselves experts when they know absolutely nothing.
thembi said:
on Friday 13-Dec-13 02:35 PM
Its true that if you pay you get good results. RAF always take shortcuts in what they do and most people only realises that after the damage has been done.
.
Bianca said:
on Tuesday 10-Dec-13 09:53 AM
What you pay is the quality of the report that you will receive however it is extremely important as Anna says to provide your experts with documentation and additional information timorously because if you fail to, the end result may not be what you expected and the expert may not be to blame in that case. I have also seen a drastic difference in our reports to those used by a Defendant attorney - the quality is quite different indeed.
Kaylee said:
on Monday 09-Dec-13 01:58 PM
I think it is shocking to see reports where the injuries are clearly far worse than detailed in these reports, especially when the injuries are serious such as a brain injury. I understand that experts may have a difference of opinion, however how can experts be so far apart on serious injuries. It scares me to think of the people that do not obtain the right advice and under settle their claim. I think this again reiterates how important it is to obtain the correct professional advice.
Simone said:
on Monday 09-Dec-13 12:59 PM
Very well said. I completely agree with your post and it is a pity that not all people realise this from the start.
Thabitha said:
on Monday 09-Dec-13 09:12 AM
What kind of experts are they and how many life they are going to destroy just because they don't want to pay
Lourien said:
on Monday 09-Dec-13 09:10 AM
We all know the saying, you pay for what you get... Unfortunately the better qualified and the more experience you have the higher the fees are, this increases every case, why do you want someone that can even do his job or has no experiance ?
Lizanne said:
on Monday 09-Dec-13 09:10 AM
That is why i always tell people that, when you have been involved in a MVA, get an attorney to represent you. The RAF do not care about you and will definitely not fight for the best possible settlement. In my point of view, the RAF is 100% false advertising when they tell people that it is less costly to claim on their own behalf....less costly for the RAF of course.
Liesl said:
on Monday 09-Dec-13 09:04 AM
The Fund is certainly not for the public as they claim to be. They bargain on the ignorance of people and stealthily get away with shabby snip work. They cannot even request a simple payment why would they make anything else that takes a bit more effort primacy...
Sorea said:
on Monday 09-Dec-13 09:00 AM
I wonder what the Fund's expert would have said if it was the expert's child? I reckon the "moderate concussive brain injury" would not have even featured in the report.
Anjelica said:
on Monday 09-Dec-13 08:57 AM
I agree, if you don't pay anything you should not expect anything better then the above mentioned. They obviously don't deliver.
Alexis said:
on Monday 09-Dec-13 08:38 AM
I fully agree with your last line - you get what you pay for. And i have seen the work of most of the Defendant's experts - seriously nothing to write home about
Johannesburg based attorney specializing in personal injury matters including Road Accident Fund claims and medical negligence matters. My interests include golf, reading and the internet and the way it is constantly developing. I have a passion for life and a desire for less stress!
